Where did I say it had been different and where did I say that they were not citizens?

The government exists to protect the rights and safety of its citizens, not its criminals. Somewhere along the line in the last 25 to 35 years this this distinction was lost.

I am saying there should be limits to what a person can do that if exceded should revoke their citizenship. Those limits should be at serious repeated felonies, not at jay walking or speeding tickets as you suggested in my case.

And where did your comment about excommunicating people based religious beliefs come from? How exactly did you extrapolate that from what I said? Very "creative" interpretation of my post.

You totally misunderstood my post or deliberately took it out of context. I'm not certain which so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Especially the comment about the spices. It was pretty obvious my comment mean that the prisoners should be made to earn the cost of keeping them (unless they are physically unable to do so) so that we don't have to pay taxes. If you don't mind paying taxes for them, trust me others do.

And Yams_mos, your argument about "well some people think everyone should be locked up" is not a rational premise. Some people think the world is flat. So what. Does that mean they should cancel all flights between the Western North America and Eastern Asia? So that planes won't fall off the Earth?

Since you distinguished between citizens and criminals and said that the distinction has been lost in the last 25-35 years, that suggests that 35 years ago there WAS a distinction between criminals and citizens. And there was not. No one was losing citizenship 35 years ago, or before.

I honestly don't think I ever said that or even ever suggested that premise. I believe you've significantly misunderstood me. If you tell me where you got that I can tell you what I meant and clear up the misunderstanding. Perhaps you're referring to my statement about some people being as concerned about any crime as you are about repeat offenders?

I wasn't speaking literally. What I meant (I didn't think it should have to be spelled out) was that the priorities were out of wack. Law-abiding citizens interests should come BEFORE those of criminals. It is beginning to appear that you are not attempting to engage in a discussion but are attempting to bait.

I honestly don't think I ever said that or even ever suggested that premise. I believe you've significantly misunderstood me. If you tell me where you got that I can tell you what I meant and clear up the misunderstanding. Perhaps you're referring to my statement about some people being as concerned about any crime as you are about repeat offenders?


Of course I was and its the same sentiment in different words and you know that. I just paraphrased what you said. Rather than looking at any merit in any of my ideas you just want to split hairs and take things out of context to try to look smart. There is not point to that.

you A criminal is a person who commits repeated felonies, especially of a larcenous or violent nature.

Such a person should not be an expense to society. Why should they even be allowed to live in the United States? If a person gets caught raping multiple times or murders a person in cold blood, why should that person become an expense of our government to begin with? Why can't we just kick them out?
me Because that's the way we do things. That's the way that our entire system is set up. If we were to change that, we'd effectively be restructuring our entire society. Forgive me if I am wrong, because I very well may be, but I believe you've spoken about incarceration before. Some people feel just as strongly about criminals who commit ANY crime as you do about violent repeat offenders. Should you be kicked out of the country? And forgive me if I'm remembering incorrectly; no offense is meant. Either way, let's just use it as an example, since it's about the topic, not you.

Again just because some people say idiotic things, does not mean anything.

Personally, I see preventative services as being worthwhile and the prisons to be a joke.

One of my friends was a security guard in a large prison in FL for a decade and according to him they are getting really lax and the management is getting worse all the time. So where is the money going?

If the politicians couldn't pocket it because it wasn't there the prisons would have to change. That is another concern. Disappearing tax dollars.

You need to look at my text. Many of those comments you quoted had been removed because I had changed my mind after reading what you had written.

And the reason I removed some of my text is because you had gone back and altered some of yours. It was what you altered that changed my opinion.

The management of these prisons is really screwed up.

Halokitty
I do not think we need to lock these sick f..kers away for life. I would be more than willing to travel the country with my gun in hand and be the federaly appointed executioner of these animals. I would have no remorse and would not lose a minutes sleep about it. Just think about it..........a box of bullets goes along way! Put the garbage in a cardboard box, plant them in potters field and drink a beer to a job well done!

But jailing an offender for life is no solution.